Question 1- William Doyle Testimony:
I attended the party at Tom Randall's apartment on Halloween. I didn't actually receive an invitation-I came along with someone who did. I don't really know him that well. This was a pretty wild party. The place was jammed, and people were out of control! Dancing, drinking, laughing, singing-you know. Mr. Randall was making the rounds, making sure that everyone was having a good time, encouraging them to drink. I saw him talking to Kelly Greene on several occasions. He kept forcing her to drink, even though she didn't seem that willing. He said things like: "Have another drink, it's the only way to have fun at parties like this," and "Don't worry, another drink won't kill you." I didn't think he should have been doing that, pressuring her to drink and all. I really like Kelly. This is her first year here at school, and she's really sweet. I don't think she would have gotten in this trouble if she hadn't been encouraged to drink too much. She's only 18, a fact I'm sure Tom was aware of. As the host, it's his responsibility to make sure that illegal drinking isn't permitted and that when people leave they are capable of driving safely.
A: Gathering and Weighing the Evidence: What facts and inferences does William Doyle make in his testimony? Are they relevant to the case?
Your response should be at least 75 words in length
Question 2-
Defense lawyers and prosecutors cross-examine the witnesses in order to help determine the credibility of the witnesses and the accuracy of their testimony.
B. Asking Important Questions: Imagine that you are the defense lawyer. Ask Helen Brooks one question of fact and explain why your question in important.
Your response should be at least 75 words in length.
Question 3-
One of the important goals of critical thinking is developing beliefs about the world that are well-founded. Often this process involves analyzing and synthesizing a variety of accounts in an effort to determine "what really happened." Analyze and synthesize the testimony presented by the witnesses as you answer the question below.
C. Constructing Knowledge: Do you believe that Mr. Randall was aware that Ms. Greene was intoxicated when she left his party? Do you believe he knew-or should have known-she would be driving home? Explain the reasons for your conclusion.
Your response should be at least 75 words in length.
Question 4-
Dr. Elizabeth Gonzalez (prosecution witness) Testimony:
I am a staff psychologist at a substance abuse center in town. Why do people drink to excess? Typically through the influence of the people around them, as happened to Kelly Greene. When most eighteen-year-old students enter college, they do not have a drinking problem. However, although few realize it, these unwary young people are entering a culture in which alcohol is the drug of choice. It is a drug that can easily destroy their lives. According to some estimates, between 80 percent and 90 percent of the students on many campuses drink alcohol. Many of these students are heavy drinkers. One study found that nearly 30 percent of university students are heavy drinkers, consuming more than fifteen alcoholic drinks a week. Another study found that among those who drink at least once a week, 92 percent of the men and 82 percent of the women consume at least five drinks in a row, and half said they wanted to get drunk. The results of all this drinking are predictably deadly. Virtually all college administrators agree that alcohol is the most widely used drug among college students and that its abuse is directly related to emotional problems and violent behavior, ranging from date rape to death. For example, at one university, a twenty-year-old woman became drunk at a fraternity party and fell to her death from the third floor. At another university, two students were killed in a drunk-driving accident after drinking alcohol at an off-campus fraternity house. The families of both students have filed lawsuits against the fraternity. When students like Kelly Greene enter a college or university, they soon become socialized into the alcohol-sodden culture of "higher education," typically at parties just like the one hosted by Mr. Randall. The influence of peer pressure is enormous. When your friends and fellow students are encouraging you to drink, it is extremely difficult to resist giving in to these pressures. In my judgment, students like Kelly Greene are corrupted by people like Tom Randall. He must share in the responsibility for her personal tragedy and for the harm that resulted from it.
D: Evaluating Expert Testimony: Is the information provided by Dr. Gonzalez relevant to the guilt or innocence of Tom Randall? Why, or why not?
Your response should be at least 75 words in length.
Question 5- Defense Summation:
The death of Melissa Anderson is, of course, a tragedy. It was the direct result of Kelly Greene's error in judgment; and although she certainly didn't intend for anything like this to occur, she must be judged for her responsibility. However, it makes no sense to rectify this tragedy by ruining Thomas Randall's life. He is in no way responsible for the death of Melissa Anderson. All he did was host a party for his friends, the kind of party that takes place all the time on virtually every college campus. He is a victim of an unreasonable law that you must be twenty-one years of age to drink alcohol. I'll bet every person in this courtroom had at least one drink of alcohol before they were twenty-one years old. If people are mature enough to vote, drive cards, hold jobs, pay taxes, and be drafted, then they are mature enough to drink alcohol. And it's unreasonable to expect a party host to run around playing policeman, telling guests who can drink and who can't. As one college president noted: "It's awfully hard to control a mixed-age group where some can drink and some can't, but all are students. Since the consumption of alcohol is not in general an illegal activity-unlike marijuana or crack-you have this bizarre situation where at the mystic age of twenty-one, suddenly people can drink legally when they couldn't the day before".
In addition, we have heard experts describe how there are many factors that contribute to alcohol abuse-besides the influence of other people. The power of advertisers, family history, and the personal choices by individuals all play a role in whether someone is going to drink excessively. It is unfair to single out one person, like Tom Randall, and blame him for Ms. Greene's behavior. Her decision to drink that night was the result of a variety of factors, most of which we will never fully understand. However, in the final analysis, Ms. Greene must be held responsible for her own free choices. When Kelly Greene attended Tom Randall's party, nobody forced her to drink-there were plenty of non-alcoholic beverages available. And after she chose to drink, nobody forced her to attempt to drive her car home-she had other alternatives. Ultimately, there was only one person responsible for the tragic events of that evening, and that person is Kelly Greene.
We live in a society in which people are constantly trying to blame everyone but themselves for their mistakes or misfortunes. This is not a healthy or productive approach. If this society is going to foster the development of independent, mature citizens, then people must be willing to accept responsibility for their own freely made choices and not look for scapegoats like Mr. Randall to blame for their failings.
E: Evaluating Summation Accounts: Outline ONE key argument used in the defense's summation. What was the conclusion? Based on what reasons or premises?
Your response should be at least 75 words in length.
Question 6- Reaching a Verdict:
Reaching a verdict in a situation like this involves complex processes of reasoning and decision making. In your discussion with the other jurors, you must decide if the evidence indicates, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant should have anticipated the destructive consequences of his behavior. In other words, did the defendant, Thomas Randall, knowingly encourage an underage woman, Kelly Greene, to drink excessively? When she left the party, should he have recognized her inebriated condition and made sure that she was not intending to drive home? Should he have been able to anticipate that terrible consequences might result if she tried to drive in her inebriated state? The principle of beyond a reasonable doubt is difficult to define in specific terms, but in general the principle means that it would not make good sense for thoughtful men and women to conclude otherwise.
F: Deliberating the Issues: Based on your analysis of the evidence and arguments presented in this case, write your verdict and explain in detail your reasons for reaching this conclusion.
Your response should be at least 75 words in length.